Research Paper On The Bystander Effect

The study by Darley and Latane leaves society with the knowledge that everyone who is witnessing an emergency is most likely thinking the same thing “someone else will call for help or has already” so “Always act as if you are the only person there” (Darely & Latane, 1968). The concept of situationism is the driving force behind bystander effect. Situationism is “social behavior is, to a larger extent than people commonly realize, a response to people’s social context, not a function of individual personality” (Fiske, 2010, p. 7). Individuals first have to decide if they are witnessing an emergency. Then they need to decide if they have a responsibility to act which is when situationism comes in. If there are hundreds of witnesses each individual see the situation from a different perspective and responsibility to act is diffused among the crowd. On the other hand if one individual sees an emergency and believes there is no one else to help the responsibility rests on him or her. The context of the situation will determine how an individual will react, but people should consider the reality of everyone believing someone else will react and no one reacting. Kitty Genovese would still be alive if even one person would have called the cops when the first attack started.

First ‘The Bystander Effect’, states ‘that individuals are less likely to intervene in emergency situations when other people are present’. Latne & Darley, (1970) cited in Byford J.( 2014 pp 232). Simply put, where emergency situations arise, if more than one person is present the likelihood of someone in distress being helped reduces. This is the ‘diffusion of responsibility’ effect were each bystander feels less obliged to help because the responsibility seems to be divided with others present’. (Byford J., 2014 pp233) An example of Bystander Apathy shown within a video (The Open University 2016).

The bystander effect is defined as the higher the number of people who notice an emergency, the less of a chance that those bystanders will help the victim (as cited in Aronson, Wilson, Akert, & Sommers, 2015). The importance of the bystander effect is unparalleled because it determines whether humans will still help in a situation when there are other people available. Bystanders can deal with situations ranging from the mundane to the dire, but what matters is the number of those who take action.

It states that when the amount of bystanders increases, the likelihood of one of the bystanders assisting drastically decreases. Many feel that if they have no obligation to help they should not, almost as if it's none of their business. To victims, a bystander who doesn’t take action is as equally evil as the perpetrator. The easiness of laughing along with others, or acting as if you saw nothing is correlated to the fact that it is easier than ever to be influenced in today’s society. Too often, ignoring the humiliation of another is seen. It may be the easy way out, however, it is certainly not the morally correct way

In the experiment they tested the responsiveness of individuals and how they reacted under stress when first, alone, and then second within a crowd. Each time the people that were under pressure and alone reacted in a higher rate than those in the crowds. Researchers have justified people’s non responsiveness within a crowd, with diffusion of responsibility, in which people are less likely to take action within a crowd, because they feel someone else will take responsibility. On March 14 1964, Kitty Genovese was the ultimate test subject for the Bystander Syndrome, having been stabbed twice in public and left to die on her apartment stairs, but the question that remains unanswered, under matters of a life, is the silence of the crowd truly due to diffusion of responsibility? Or lack of interest and

Have you ever seen an incident happen and not do anything about it? Well in “Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police”, thirty-eight people saw a murder happen and decide not to do anything about it. By watching an incident happen and not intervene is called the bystander effect this is where you watch an event happen and do nothing because you feel like it’s none of your business or because someone else isn’t helping why should you. In this essay the writer explains an incident that happened and how people witnessed it but didn’t do anything making them bystanders.

Nonetheless, the bystander effect does not apply to everybody without exception. There are still some people who will sincerely try their best to help others, like Hugo Tale-Yax who actually was trying a help a woman under assault when the attacker killed him (Litch 651). I believe as long as one person try their best to help, so will others. In the end, try our best to help is better than do nothing but only the help from other

Why the witnesses demonstrated a lack of reaction towards the victim's need for help? In 1968, two Social psychologists Bibb Latané and John Darley came up with a concept called “The Bystander Effect”, which supposed “the presence of diffusion of responsibility” and “social influence”.

Usually, people know how to help; and sometimes there are individuals who understand how to quickly help hurt shoulders or sprains. Some folks can even make recommendations on how to approach the next week with an injury. I may have observed the bystander effect more in other countries that my family visited when I was younger. Since I have never lived for long periods of time in cities I feel that I have less experience with the bystander effect. However, Milgram's view that we may be managing the information that could flood our minds makes sense.

this brutal murder and not one of them informed the police? The bystander effect states that, in

The bystander effect is both a social and psychological phenomenon in which an individual’s inclination towards showing helping behaviours are minimised by the influence of other people. Research has found that the more people acting as bystanders in a situation, the less likely it is that helping behaviours will be demonstrated. However in the correct conditions, where conditioned cues increase self-awareness, it is possible to reverse the bystander effect phenomenon. The bystander effect is prevalent in everyday life, and often decorates the news, shocking the world, especially when authority figures such as police men and women succumb to the effect. Diffusion of responsibility, ignorance of others interpretation of an event and self-consciousness are all social processes which appear to lead to social inhibition of helping behaviours and one of the main theories of the bystander effect is provided Latané and Darley (1970) whose cognitive model provides a series of decisions that can lead to social inhibition. The bystander effect is influenced by the conditions an individual is in when an event occurs, for example the bystander effect appears to be most dominant when an individual is in a group of strangers with low group cohesiveness. FINISH

A case very similar to this is the Kitty Genovese case. In this case, “Genovese was stabbed and raped over the course of half an hour. It was reported that 38 people had witnessed her struggle but did not call the police” (Encore, 2016). Although the Genovese case is an extreme case, what happens to Michael is still a valid example of the bystander effect. The movie demonstrates this effect because at the games and school no one feels the urgency to help Michael because other people are around that could help.

"The Bystander Effect" is a short video on the study how people reacted to others in distress while in a crowd. Most would assume there is safety within numbers, however, the results prove that that may not always be the case. This study seems to bring to attention that while in a larger crowd people may actually be less likely to receive help. This may be due to our human behavior of doing the same as everyone else, or possibly a mental thought of let someone else handle it, do not get involved. These findings could easily bring on a new fear of being in crowded areas.

The bystander effect theory is a psychological phenomenon were people do not help others in emergency situations when there are others present, the bigger the crowd the less likely chance of someone stepping in to help. In 1964, there was a woman who was brutally murdered and there were approximately 30 witnesses who did not intervene to save her. This case was

Studies show that diffusion of responsibility accounts for results in bystander hypothesis studies. As Baron et al. explain, the bystander effect occurs when the number of persons willing to help decreases with the number of people present. Darley and Latane (1968) assert that in the presence of others, bystanders reduce the individual feelings of personal responsibility and lower the speed of reporting an incident. Thus, in prosocial situations an individual's willingness to intervene or assist someone in need is inhibited by the presence of other people. The individual is under the belief that other people present will or should intervene, and does not perceive it as his or her responsibility to take action. In addition, diffusion of responsibility